Wednesday, September 21, 2016

Other people's money

The Republican candidate for President has a history of saying outrageous things, destined to keep himself in the headlines. And indeed he has said some pretty outlandish things, none of which seem to bother his devoted and loyal minions .

But recently, he said something which should give even his most devoted acolytes pause. He has bragged about his penchant and his ability to use other people's money in the furtherance of his business objectives. Minimizing his own risk and using OPM ( Other people's money ) is his stock in trade, so he brags, as if that ability to lure the unwary investor is a virtue, in that he profits from using their money.

Let's pause here to remember that Donald Trump is not running for President of the stock exchange. He is running for President of the entire country, and as such would be the Commander in chief of using OPM , other's people's money, to wit , our tax dollars , to achieve the common objectives of the country.

I hasten to add that he has also bragged that he pays as little in taxes as he can. I guess that makes sense if you are Donald Trump, because then it is other people's money that is being used to buy jet fighters and aircraft carriers and to pay for the health costs of the elderly and the poor.

I am reminded of one of Hugh Carey's favorite lines when he was running for Governor against Nelson Rockefeller's handpicked successor, Malcolm Wilson " Rocky spent our money like it was his money!" Spending other people's money is what politicians do best. Giving a man like Donald Trump command of the Executive budget of the United States of America to spend OPM is a scary prospect indeed. He professes to be a conservative , but when it comes to spending other people's money, Katy bar the door! Would he do things like buy $10,000 self portraits , and pay off people who won hole in one contests. Who knows?

That's why it is really critical to get a look at his tax returns, to see where his money comes from, and what it goes to, and how much of his money goes to the commonweal to run the government , if any.

If how you spend money depends on whether or not it is your own money or someone else's , let the buyer beware. Big time!

Friday, September 9, 2016

Hillary’s
Hard A

Try as she may, Hillary Clinton is still not
connecting at the gut level with much of the American electorate. I have
struggled to analyze why, and think I have the answer. Try as I may,
repeatedly, I have been unable to get anyone in the Clinton camp to pay
attention to this suggestion. So, time to go public with my thesis in a kind of
Hail Mary pass. Here goes:

In the last few days of the Presidential
campaign, we have heard much about “softening”, and “hardening” of
positions. I can’t figure out if the Republican candidate is really
softening his position on immigration or not. One minute he sounds softer,
then the next he is hard at it again. Kellyanne Conway, his new campaign
manager, has obviously brought out a softer side of Donald Trump, as long as he
reads words from a teleprompter. The problem resurfaces when he goes off
script, and his normal tendency is to go from soft to hard edged
rhetoric. That’s just how he rolls. His opponent, Hillary Clinton,
however, has her own soft vs. hard thing going. After watching many of
her speeches, I finally figured out why so many people find it difficult to
believe what she says. It is all about the way she says it.

Hillary uses the hard
pronunciation of the indefinite article “a”. Hillary almost always
pronounces “a” as “eh”(which rhymes with hay), not “uh” (which rhymes with
duh). According to most grammar experts, the hard “A” is properly used
when denoting something unique, or singular, or formal, like a book title, as
in “A” bridge too far" as opposed to “uh” bridge too far. Over use
of the hard “A” results in the speaker being perceived as formalistic and
defensive, which is how Hillary comes across.

I would be interested in
seeing the reaction of white men over 50 who read what she says, as opposed to
listening to it. I think you might get an altogether different
reaction. It is often not the content of her speech, but the quality of
it that annoys many. How we say things does matter, and with her overuse of the
hard “A”, Hillary comes off as someone who is simply not genuine. Translate
that to not believable. It is as simple as that. I find it hard to
understand with all the political pros she has on her side, why no one seems to
have told her what she needs to do to fix it. Message to Hillary
Clinton: drop the hard “A”. “What A great campaign we had” should
become what a (Uh) great campaign. A hard “A’ is often too formalistic. It is
as simple as that. I am not a linguistics expert, but I am a student of
political speechmaking , and have been for over 40 years, and I can spot a
problem when I see one. Hillary has A problem.

Every time she is asked why people just
don’t believe her, she struggles to answer the question. Well, there’s
the answer. Soften the use of the “a’ and see how her poll ratings would
soar. When you are running for President, or any office for that matter,
how you say things, tone, accent, inflection, is often as important was what
you say. Hillary has “A” problem.

Accents, colloquialisms , and
regional nuances of speech have historically played a very important part in
shaping a politician's success. Take JFK for example. His "pahk your cah
in the yahd " accent seemed to elevate his electability , and ability to
endear himself to the American people. Somehow. and for some unknown reason,
Boston accents are often just, adorable in ways that Chicago hard A’s and
upstate NY flat A’s are not. If you don't believe me, consider the success of
the guys on NPR’s “Car talk” ( The "tap fort" brothers ). People just
love the way they sound, and how they laugh, in addition to the comedic things
they say.

People do not much like the
way Hillary sounds at times, because of her overuse of the hard “A”. She
just seems disingenuous. It is this school marmish way of condescendingly
talking to her errant pupils that tends to upend her. She adopts the affect of
a hall monitor, which is very off putting. She needs to change the way
she speaks, and pronto. She has already taken some steps to stop the shouting
from the podium, and sound more conversational. This is the next big step
she needs to take.

Bernie Sander's Brooklyn
accent, which turned out to be unendearing to some heartland voters, actually
worked in his favor with many, by building his believability quotient. When he
says " Enough already!", people get it. They hear and they get him in
a deep seated kind of way. He is , above all else, believable. If what you say
doesn't ring true, or doesn't sound true, it will not be perceived as true. You
have to own what you say for people to believe in you, and Hillary just doesn't
sound like she owns what she says, much of the time.

When Hillary ran for the
senate in NY, she became a great student of everything Upstate, and she won.
She can fix this problem too. But first, she, and her staff have to recognize
the nature of the problem, before they can turn it around. Hello Houston. Hello
Brooklyn. Hello Hillary. We've got a problem. Let's fix it. Say goodbye
to the hard “A”. Softer, at least in this case, is way better.